From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Sunshine Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] bisect--helper: rewrite of check-term-format() Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 20:35:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1462338472-3581-1-git-send-email-pranit.bauva@gmail.com> <1462546167-1125-1-git-send-email-pranit.bauva@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Christian Couder , Christian Couder , Lars Schneider , Johannes Schindelin , Git List , Paul Tan To: Pranit Bauva X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 16 02:35:56 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1b26Vf-0001bk-U2 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 16 May 2016 02:35:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752025AbcEPAfm (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2016 20:35:42 -0400 Received: from mail-ig0-f195.google.com ([209.85.213.195]:35986 "EHLO mail-ig0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751908AbcEPAfl (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2016 20:35:41 -0400 Received: by mail-ig0-f195.google.com with SMTP id c3so5679077igl.3 for ; Sun, 15 May 2016 17:35:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=+PZIHjybw4vSex+Wf7lwmQsVLfQ9Svykg8yief1FzAk=; b=m5JkgMsvnxX6bbTEIJ5rz1SYfgFnvwSCNh3od5dqbNLgzHeVargEXe7lt72iMY3cZB bPuk+1aU12zFJ2REn3fg9udnAonWMGe8Mh+Tz8WPwFqAQsVXJn0DXXczkYHeLz5NVkLv WuZRPii8X58jg8xqf5wuK3DFosrFLkiQteXbp+GZc7nJpzZRIqkShRTCBPHpwOs1WmjK oQlmIuekA2ZzJocNBSrIp/hO8xqxq2QOzdFeJMVMSCIGU5gWEMtswQWgku/KStPksS3J JbQ1joGcPAuu+6qjQrAeUmtrcFl0y/OJau30mJbUWLdIX+lGntRM4OwBIgm1P3mns9GN FvHg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=+PZIHjybw4vSex+Wf7lwmQsVLfQ9Svykg8yief1FzAk=; b=ZnJfcDM5BkeX2Ca/SqI+J3AqpjtSrxJyC5+NVX9tn1wI1I9IVNOQbLQ47dx5ZrCQ4j rEmMh8jtn54FvoqNCcLnX5jeMZNpjFurw2g/9spdRVEDgr+LjgPHHv1UnCY8N9oQMcKa UfRoRbE7pb50v4uyemP1rm4iBDwjsFY/hBWdA0o9psnhIOGipILOw5NHmhYWf1XjOste ip968Jl+2wOMuaO2jDAoQvsETWwuBFl75oxDShbFTAUMZ/NfUVLQBh8vOozHr4CEA4zR LkhImjGvCJgaGtueXhdQYWWKrAyrBDuzFcVJQ/IKcV64ccgHoYB1dsRCSA+n5+o5jrra BJSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FW9VuhLPRRw1N4WdPMPh12GMZBXK6974o5zwrsRGU/BRAItEE1NrlJ/hNJaAd/HjDws10pqZ5eg1LeqAA== X-Received: by 10.50.3.105 with SMTP id b9mr8879333igb.17.1463358940826; Sun, 15 May 2016 17:35:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.79.139.4 with HTTP; Sun, 15 May 2016 17:35:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: AXVAyQCajnPhMEDMMR-7xZGrGvA Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote: > On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote: >> On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Pranit Bauva writes: >>>> I completely missed your point and you want me to go the Eric Sunshine's way? >>> >>> I am neutral. >>> >>> When I read your response to Eric's "top down" suggestion, I didn't >>> quite get much more than "I started going this way, and I do not >>> want to change to the other direction.", which was what I had the >>> most trouble with. If your justification for the approach to start >>> from building a tiny bottom layer that will need to be dismantled >>> soon and repeat that (which sounds somewhat wasteful) were more >>> convincing, I may have felt differently. >> >> Sorry if it seemed that "I have done quite some work and I don't want >> to scrape it off and redo everything". This isn't a case for me. I >> think of this as just a small part in the process of learning and my >> efforts would be completely wasted as I can still reuse the methods I > > efforts would **not** be completely wasted > >> wrote. This is still open for a "philosophical" discussion. I am >> assuming 1e1ea69fa4e is how Eric is suggesting. Speaking of 1e1ea69 (pull: implement skeletal builtin pull, 2015-06-14), one of the (numerous) things Paul Tan did which impressed me was to formally measure test suite coverage of the commands he was converting to C, and then improve coverage where it was lacking. That approach increases confidence in the conversion far more than fallible human reviews do. Setting aside the top-down vs. bottom-up discussion, as a reviewer (and user) I'd be far more interested in seeing you spend a good initial chunk of your project emulating Paul's approach to measuring and improving test coverage (though I don't know how your GSoC mentors feel about that).